The Russian Nesting Pivot?

Russia is reinforcing their garrisons that face Japan on islands (the Southern Kurils, or as Japan calls them the Northern Territories) taken from Japan at the end of World War II:

Russia said on Monday it had built new barracks for troops on a disputed chain of islands near Japan and would build more facilities for armored vehicles, a move likely to anger Tokyo after it urged Moscow to reduce its military activity there.

As Russia maintains their pointless and counterproductive hostility toward the West, Russia is seeking to anger Japan in the east, too?

Unless this apparent anti-Japanese move is designed to disguise a Russian pivot to the Far East to build up capabilities to deter or defeat China, this type of move makes no sense to me.

Of course, after Russia moves troops to the Far East to "face Japan," Russia could erase that bad effect on Japan (and America) very quickly with a peace treaty with Japan.

And then Russia could reduce tensions in the West that I think could be a case of Russia concealing their appeasement of China.

As I've said many times, it is difficult to hide what you are doing. And Russia can't hide what they are doing in the Far East. Real concealment consists of convincing foes that what they see is for something that isn't a threat to them at all.

Basically, Russia's search for a Far East strategy is confusing only because Russia won't admit--yet--that the point of a Russian Far East strategy has to be deterring China.

Marching (and Sailing and Flying) on Our Stomach

Yes, logistics will be key in a war with China or Russia. Normally that would be something from the "Well, Duh" files.

But after nearly three decades of not worrying about facing an enemy that could wage conventional war for a long period, this is a good thing to keep in mind:

The United States is blessed with a geography that has given it two wide oceans to guard its flanks, insulating it from many direct challenges to the homeland. But the same isolation that helps protect the United States also becomes a tyranny of distance when it comes to the U.S. military's ability to project force on the Eurasian landmass. During both World War II and the Cold War, the United States had to account for (and, in the case of World War II, battle across) the Atlantic Ocean to deploy forces in Europe. Similarly, the United States has created a vast logistics chain to ensure its ability to project forces across the Pacific Ocean to East Asia, Australasia and beyond.

Today, the United States benefits greatly from supply chains and transportation infrastructure that allow it to trade and deploy its forces across large distances in peacetime. Nevertheless, the United States must prepare for the real possibility that it will not enjoy such unencumbered access to maritime routes if its competition with either China or Russia escalates into open hostilities. And compounding the issue for Washington is the emergence of new disruptive technologies, the weakening strength of the United States' merchant marine fleet and the myriad diplomatic issues that Washington must consider every time it crosses national boundaries.

Do read it all.

Working with NATO to ease the physical an legal barriers in the new NATO states is one way we are working on this. Another is to stand up a fleet for the Atlantic to get forces and supplies to Europe in the first place. And we are practicing moving brigades from the continental United States to Europe (and to South Korea now).

I've noted all those efforts.

Rebuilding war reserve stocks of ammunition and spare parts so we can fight until factories can ramp up from "peacetime" (you know what I mean) levels is crucial.

Luckily we aren't as bad off as we could be without the Iraq War. Based on our experience in Desert Storm when we moved multiple iron mountains to Saudi Arabia that were never needed to defeat Saddam's army, we flirted with "just in time" logistics in Iraq. It worked in the invasion but in the insurgency we discovered that insurgents could interrupt the flow, leading us to at least build "iron hills" to endure temporary supply cuts. And the mountain concept was retained in landlocked Afghanistan.

Hopefully that pain of supply worries is remembered as we work on other issues, like our weak merchant marine.

And remember that this need for a global logistics tail is a major reason we have relatively few combat units compared to other nations with far lower defense budgets.

But What if the Reds Come Back?

The Chinese Communist Party just kept the ruthlessly enforced monopoly on power from the original:

In China the government is cracking down on another threatening political movement; radical communists. While communism is still taught in universities and the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) is the largest (and only legal) political organization in China, early 20 th century communism (as pioneered by the Russian Bolshevik’s) is no longer considered acceptable in China. Because of that students of Communism agitating for the return of labor unions is seen as a threat to the CCP.

Xi has concentrated power, which may reflect a lingering worry over revolution. Tienanmen* Square was a frightening episode for the ruling class. But communism's ruthless enforcement of their monopoly on power was an always appreciated (from the Strategypage link) feature and used at Tiananmen* Square:

British and American intelligence estimates were of over 10,000 dead and 40,000 wounded. These were not unclassified until 2014. The British data indicates the number of dead was somewhat higher and Chinese officials who spoke to British diplomatic personnel indicated that the government was not seeking an official number, even if highly classified but the number regularly used by Chinese officials was “at least 10,000.”

In addition to casualty figures there were a lot of details on how the attack was carried out, including the use of promises (quickly broken) to allow demonstrators (including survivors of the first round of killing) to leave. The troops apparently had orders to kill all civilians in the square and destroy the bodies where they fell. This included crushing the dead using armored vehicles, burning those remains and flushing those remains down storm drains. The area was sealed off for over a month so the cleanup could be thorough.

The "social credit score" is the softer method of control to prevent another 1989 from forming.

Xinjiang is where the gloves come off.

Although good old fashioned police state arrests remain a staple of control:

The wives of four of China's most prominent rights lawyers and activists shaved their heads on Monday in protest over what they called the "persecution" of their husbands by the government.

Since taking office in 2012, Chinese President Xi Jinping has overseen a crackdown on dissent, with hundreds of rights lawyers and activists being detained, arrested and jailed.

Tibet has a core of resistance left but little news comes out of that black hole.

And Hong Kong is the only place where hope still lives (for now).

Actually, there is another place for hope. When all else fails, isn't that Taiwan's ultimate defense? The Chinese might not think that is far-fetched. Who can tell when the Mandate of Heaven is lost?

And if China is too large for even stronger centralized power to control (with a bonus early horrified look at the "social credit" plan), that might matter.

Remember, next June 4th is the 30th anniversary of Tiananmen* Square. Who knows what could spark a Han Spring?

Perhaps China will overcome their worry over troop loyalty that existed in 1989.

*Transliterating foreign languages bedevils my attempt to search old posts.

UPDATE: Of course, the social credit score system is probably just the interim safeguard until China can genetically engineer compliant and loyal subjects.

The Sea Control Mission Returns

Run silent, run deep, shoot far:

With an eye on China, the Navy will begin arming its attack submarines with ship-killer missiles for the first time in decades. The weapon of choice: an updated model of the decades-old Harpoon.

In a little-noticed announcement posted earlier this month on a government contracting site, the Navy said it was entering into negotiations with Boeing to refurbish and recertify Harpoon anti-ship missiles for Los Angeles-class subs. It’s a major shift after decades in which submarines focused on projecting power ashore — stealthily collecting intelligence or launching Tomahawk Land-Attack Missiles (TLAMs) — with their only anti-ship weapons being their rarely-used torpedoes.

I mentioned this move back in June.

I am very glad to see this move, especially because I hadn't noticed the loss of the Harpoons in the fleet because some of our surface ships continued to have Harpoons:

Give [the Navy] their Goddamn Harpoons back.

My 2013 wish has been fulfilled. Although not for the LCS which seems trapped in the littoral era of power projection ashore.

In related news, the Navy is thinking of boosting its presence in Alaska:

The US Navy is looking at a number of ways to increase its presence in the Arctic around Alaska, including deployments of the service's advanced maritime patrol aircraft, the P-8A Poseidon, the Navy's top civilian official said last week.

This would be at Adak in the Aleutian Islands. These planes are useful for ocean surveillance, anti-submarine warfare, and anti-ship warfare. If the Chinese try to operate east of Japan this will be useful. And the Russians will have to be wary of sending their subs out.

UPDATE: The F-35 will soon get the ability to strike naval targets. Well I should hope so.

Also, Turkey is not going to lose their position in the production supply chain. That could be a problem given Erdogan's problem as an ally.

The Russian Awakening?

Just as India has been persuaded to shift away from Russia to America to contain a rising China, India could yet pull Russia away from China to enable India and Russia to contain a rising China.

Buy away India:

India and Russia have agreed to strengthen the already robust military-technical partnership between the two countries, the Indian government's Press Information Bureau (PIB) announced on 13 December.

Following meetings in New Delhi between Indian Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and her visiting counterpart from Russia, Sergei Shoigu, the PIB said the two sides agreed to expand joint manufacturing projects and to work towards the signing of a restructured military-technical accord.

As I've said before, I'm fine with India retaining military purchases from Russia.

American weapons would be better. But Russian weapons are better than what India can produce these days. So if buying Russian strengthens India to contain the China threat, I'm fine with that.

And more importantly Russian ties to India may yet pull Russia away from Russia's policy of appeasement of China and instead get Russia to join India (and indirectly America) to stop China from being the dominant country on the planet to the detriment of America, India, and Russia (and pretty much everyone else but Iran's and North Korea's odious rulers).

I swear, our job isn't to stop Russia from defeating NATO--which we can do with our far greater power--but to stop Russia from doing something stupid and self-destructive like provoking a war with NATO that wrecks Russia's ability to flip and oppose China.

Although in the new year there is little hope that sanity will break out in Moscow over their self-destructive policy towards the West.

UPDATE: It's going to take a while to get that awakening:

President Vladimir Putin on Thursday said the West was trying to hold back an increasingly powerful Russia, during an end-of-year press conference that took aim at sanctions and "made-up" spy scandals.

Why would the West try to hold back Russia when Putin is effing up royally and weakening Russia? As I asked in that post:

What Western plot could be as effective at wrecking Russia than Putin himself?

It would be funny if he didn't have nukes.

The SOCOM Queen

Congress is worried about the Navy support for sea-based special forces. The AFRICOM Queen modularized auxiliary cruiser is the answer.

Yes, the Navy has all it can do to face China's growing fleet, Russia's residual fleet close to Russia, and Iran's forces in the Gulf region. Supporting special ops from the sea is a lower priority mission for the Navy:

The struggle between managing resources for the United States’ counterterrorism fight and an emerging great power competition has quietly begun.

While the U.S. Navy is building up the fleet, the focus on peer-level adversaries like Russia and China is at contention with the responsibility to provide off-shore staging areas for special operations forces.

The issue was put forward by Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst at a hearing on Navy and Marine Corps readiness Wednesday.

And while special operations forces can and do operate from other Navy vessels (and subs), any deployment on a warship effectively chains that warship to non-sea control missions while the special forces are based on the ship.

The article notes that special operations command has chartered a commercial vessel for this purpose.

Special operations could get much more with The AFRICOM Queen concept based on commercial container ships. As I argued even before the shift in our strategy to oppose China and Russia, the Navy is too small to routinely assign scarce amphibious assets for missions in AFRICOM--or indeed in any mission in a higher military priority region. The situation is worse now even if the Navy is expanded.

Nuclear-Armed Stupidity

Somebody noticed that Russia is not playing 3D chess in foreign policy. But a Russia with so many nukes can do a lot of damage while effing up royally.

Finally, somebody wonders what the point of Putin's victories is:

And yet, have these moves had their intended strategic outcomes? Is Putin really a master strategist taking advantage of hapless European and American leaders?

No he isn't. Yet Putin could decide that more cowbell is the answer to his failures "despite" his military conquests:

Putin has certainly taken advantage of European and U.S indecision and lack of policy coherence to gain short- to medium-term victories. And he continues to use disinformation and denial to great effect. Yet, for all the issues in the United States and Europe—of which there are plenty, as is normal for any democracy where political pluralism exists—Putin has done nothing to achieve a brighter future for Russia. And as domestic disapproval lingers and even deepens, he will likely try his hand at further foreign interventions, both military and non-military. After all, as he himself recently projected while answering questions about Ukraine: “War helps cover up failures in economic and social policy.”

I've long argued that Putin is no strategic genius (and Mattis gets it).

Putin may yet become the "czar of all the Russias" (tip to the PJ Media live blog)--although I'm not sure why that step is necessary--but there might just be one shrunken Russia for Putin to rule.

But with so many nukes, even effing up his own country makes Putin a danger to the West.

Have a super sparkly day.

#WhyRussiaCan'tHaveNiceThings

UPDATE: Putin says a nuclear arms race could come from America's refusal to talk to Russia about Russia's violation of the INF treaty. Repeat the hashtag.

Can Ukraine Raise the Price of Russian Aggression?

Is Russia preparing to imminently escalate their war against Ukraine with overt military action? Could this backfire big time?

That's what this analysis contends:

Russia is taking overt steps towards open conflict with Ukraine. Russia has been waging a covert war against Ukraine using proxy separatist forces in eastern Ukraine since 2014. The Russian military is now preparing its forces for direct military involvement. The Kremlin is reinforcing ground, naval, and air elements in its Southern Military District - the command likely responsible for managing its ongoing war in Ukraine. Moscow may calculate that the international community will not meaningfully respond if the visibility of its role in the war now increases.

Is Russia really willing to endure the casualties to achieve a major objective?

And if Russia is planning this, what about all the talk about how Russia was brilliantly conducting a "hybrid war" to create "frozen conflicts" that benefit Russia?

If that was so brilliant, why is Russia abandoning that and planning to wage open warfare against Ukraine?

Of course, I can believe Putin might escalate--believing he can get a short and glorious war that avoids casualties--because I think little of the analysis that attributes brilliance to Putin's foreign policy towards the West.

Besides, if the West is finally going to stop going along with the fiction that Russia isn't fighting Ukraine in the Donbas, why wouldn't Russia escalate before Western sanctions follow that apparent revelation?

Also, given limited Russian resources I've felt Ukraine's real front line is in Syria. And if the Syrian front is winding down with an Assad victory, Russia will be able to return their focus to Ukraine.

Of course, the latest signs of war could mean nothing more than past indications. Or maybe Russia judges that the West will think the preparations mean nothing and thus get the element of surprise. Hard to say.

I hope Ukraine is prepared to bleed a Russian ground invasion in the east and is prepared to bombard Russia's Crimean base area and otherwise sink Russian warships with land-based missiles and aircraft, plus a naval mine campaign off of Russian-controlled ports.

UPDATE: Strategypage has more. Read it all. Mainly I took away that the AstroTurf rebels in the Donbas are losing their stomach for the fight and Russians pretending to be Ukrainians have to take up the slack. And yes, Russia has been building up forces for the last year along the border.

For what? Is the Sea of Azov Russia's escalation to squeeze Ukraine (and what will the Ukrainians with OSCE observers on a new naval mission to the Sea of Azov face?) or do the Russians want to take advantage of the winding down of Russia's Syria expedition to renew a mobile ground war against Ukraine?

And I'd like to point out again that people called Russia's invasion of the Donbas--which they denied doing despite obviously invading--brilliant because it created a "frozen conflict." Well, people at the pointy end of the Russian stick aren't frozen and they aren't pleased to be dying for what they have.

The SFAB Queen?

Could an American security force assistance brigade based on land and on modularized auxiliary cruisers support African states to resist jihadis and Chinese or Russian influence as part of our new policy on Africa that will focus on strengthening African states rather than direct American military action?

America is adjusting our Africa policy. America has an interest in economic development and rule of law in Africa, which would reduce the need for our military action and strengthen resistance to Chinese or Russian influence.

There is blatant interference in the very possibility of voting and violence and inflammatory language to sway voters if they make it to polls. Plus disease and lingering conflicts (even if this one looks promising lately) that distract from development. Plus ethnic hatreds. And that's on top of the jihadi threat that plagues a number of states in Africa.

And we really don't want African states playing America and West off against the Chinese and Russians to simply extort more money from both sides. Although perhaps we should tell them they need to choose America or North Korea, too.

But while the UN peacekeeping has not worked, just keeping a lid on the conflicts to prevent them from getting worse is worth the money. So I disagree with ideas to cut peacekeeping funding for Africa. If we do that, how long will it be before odious governments ask China to replace UN troops to deal with opposition. Then it will get really brutal.


The 10% drawdown of American forces in AFRICOM's area of responsibility will disproportionately affect special forces direct action. What could replace them?

The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., argued that Africa’s sheer size makes small, individual deployments like the kinds that are being cut inefficient anyway. He is pushing for the permanent stationing of a Security Force Assistance Brigade, or SFAB, that he says would offer flexibility of mobility on a continent that is so geographically enormous and culturally and politically diverse.

“You don’t know if it’s going to be a Zimbabwe problem or an Ethiopia problem, but wherever it is, it’s going to be a long way from the last one, so if you have a dedicated troop ready to spring that could actually get people there better—if you can respond by quicker by using that method, it could be an improvement,” he said.

Something must be done because we don't want Africa to deteriorate and compel us to send resources that would otherwise be directed to opposing China and Russia (and North Korea and Iran to lesser extents). That is the reason for pulling special forces from Africa, keep in mind.

If mobility is the answer to fewer troops, The AFRICOM Queen is ideal.

I've figured with fewer special forces such an auxiliary cruiser could help with a mobile reserve.

Further, my idea for AFRICOM was based on a whole-of-government platform that could project power to kill and build.

If enabling local forces is how we will compensate for fewer special forces in Africa, would The SFAB Queen be the best form for The AFRICOM Queen?

"Afghanistan" is Still a Geographic Term

This article argues that the Afghanistan central government is the weak spot in our effort to win in Afghanistan:

Afghanistan, in its present incarnation, is an artificially created and relatively young state. For most of its history, its government did not need great legitimacy, since the state center was relatively weak and legitimacy was primarily focused at the kalay (or village) level. Legitimacy of the central government, perhaps because of the substantial autonomy of the countryside, was primarily based on having a generally-accepted royal family whose influence extended little beyond Kabul in normal times, and indirect rule through provincial governors and district administrators to represent the capital in remote regions.

Afghans vote (and rig votes) based on their ethnicity and there is no real national government.

This is basically what I argued for nearly a decade ago before the surges:

The end result in Afghanistan, if all goes well, will be a nominal national government that controls the capital region and reigns but does not rule local tribes and which actually helps the locals a bit rather than sucking resources from the locals, who in turn do not make trouble for the central government or allow their areas to be used by jihadis to plan attacks on the West. We press for reasonable economic opportunities, with bribes all around (I mean, foreign aid), to keep a fragile peace.

And we stick around this time, unlike after the Soviets left Afghanistan when we ignored the place, for a generation or two to see if we can move Afghanistan into the 19th century (hey, let's not get ahead of ourselves).

I based that on the belief that "Afghanistan" is a geographic and not a political term. A decade of effort hasn't changed that fact.

And apparently we also haven't empowered local authority. In the past I thought we were heading that way with our support for local defense forces, which I thought would be the basis for local authority (and legitimacy). I was wrong about that.

As the authors of that article argue, the US needs to build the basis of legitimacy that have been wrecked by generations of war that doesn't rely on a "national" government that cannot have legitimacy. And fight corruption, of course. Which I often drone on about.

Although I reject the notion that America lost an opportunity to pretend we won and get out after our forces killed Osama bin Laden. Since when is strategy about pretending to win?

If the Taliban would go away, a weak national government could survive. Our strategy seems to be about getting the Taliban to agree to that and so far they don't seem to be interested. We hope that military punishment will provide the motivation. But as long as Taliban leadership has a sanctuary in Pakistan can we kill enough of the foot soldiers to persuade the leaders to make peace?

UPDATE: Strategypage looks at Afghanistan, with the information that while the government has about 300,000 security forces the Taliban have 60,000. It is unclear if the Taliban total means full timers or includes part-timers. The Taliban endure a much higher rate of casualties than government forces.

Also, the real problem in Afghanistan remains Pakistan, which is increasingly a jihadi-influenced nuclear weapons state.

UPDATE: Trump will order half of our 14,000 troops to leave Afghanistan? So soon after we built up troops a bit, expanded our efforts, and convinced allies to add troops? That's a mistake. Bigly. Our allies will no doubt pull out some of their forces, too.

But Pakistan--which controls the Taliban and works hard to kill Indians--will be delighted that their pet Taliban will be emboldened and strengthened. The only thing I will say in defense of the reported decision--despite the optics that will at least temporarily reduce the morale of Afghan forces--is that if we have alternate ways of providing support to Afghan forces that pulling out troops doesn't have to be a disaster.

Afghanistan's president says this won't be a problem. But he'd have to say that, wouldn't he? We'll see what the details are.

As I said when Obama ordered US troops out of Iraq in 2011, the decision doesn't guarantee disaster, but it increases the chances of disaster.

Moving Forward to What Threat?

The surface-to-surface missile module for the LCS is moving forward:

In a major milestone for the program, Navy officials expect to complete testing and evaluation of the littoral combat ship Surface-to-Surface Missile Module early next year, two months ahead of schedule.

This week’s announcement was a positive step for LCS mission module programs, which have have been plagued with development delays and certification snafus. ...

They were testing how well the package could counter swarms of small boats and boost a vessel’s visit, board, search and seizure capabilities.

But remember this equips the ship with the Hellfire missile which, while long range for the Army is a short range missile for the Navy. The new missile module is meant for attacking small boat swarms rather than battling enemy ships that will outrange the Hellfire easily.

I'm hoping that rather than being "the" SSM module it will be just one of them, which will include longer-ranged missiles. Harpoon should just be a start on that family of SSM modules.

Also, isn't this Hellfire module made for a mission close to shores that is insane to carry out? I mean, I thought the Pentagon admitted the too expensive and too vulnerable LCS shouldn't be in those green and brown littoral waters.

Isn't the Hellfire module intended to carry out a mission that the Navy won't send the LCS to accomplish?

The Form of the Attention Remains in Doubt

Yes, the civil war based on territorial control in Syria appears to be winding down (whether that means rebels won't fight an insurgency or terrorist campaign is another question). Which means now is a good time for Israel to attack Hezbollah in strength before the terror group backed by Iran can redeploy back to Lebanon where it holds territory as an effective state that cripples the formal Lebanon state.

As Israel destroys Hezbollah tunnels from Lebanon to Israel, this is true:

Israel's tunnel search comes at a time when the civil war in neighboring Syria seems to be winding down. Hezbollah had sent hundreds of troops to Syria in 2013 to fight alongside the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad. With Assad's forces emerging victorious, attention now seems to be returning to the tense Israel-Lebanon border.

Israel said its troops have discovered at least three tunnels along the frontier — a tactic used by Hezbollah in previous wars — and called on the international community to impose new sanctions on Hezbollah.

Which is why it makes sense for Israel to ready their Northern Shield with this anti-tunnel operation prior to using a Northern Sword to mount a multi-division ground raid all the way to Baalbek to tear up the Hezbollah infrastructure and logistics tail away from the border.

And Israeli air and missile power would savage Hezbollah forces rushing back to Lebanon from Syria once the Israelis cross the border.

Of course, Israel needs to be pretty sure it has locked down all the tunnels:

Israel's army said Sunday it has uncovered another Hezbollah "attack tunnel" leading from Lebanon into its territory, the fourth since it started a search-and-destroy operation this month.

But I am mystified why Lebanese troops are at the border when they are powerless to control Hezbollah and are powerless to stop Israel if it moves. I assume Hezbollah's influence demanded that Lebanon send troops to die in case there is war, regardless of whether Israel wants to hit Lebanese government targets while they hammer Hezbollah.

UNIFIL is, of course, useless as the existence of the tunnels in the UN force's area of responsibility shows.

Well, not quite useless since the UN force confirmed that Hezbollah broke the ceasefire:

U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon said Monday that two of the four tunnels discovered by Israel and allegedly dug by the Hezbollah militant group cross the border in violation of the cease-fire agreement that ended the 2006 war.

If Israel is serious about harming Hezbollah before it can recover from the Syrian multi-war and use that combat experience to forge a better ground force to fight Israel, Israel has the legal pretext now.

Although I can be quite wrong about the dots and their connections, as I have been wrong for a long time.

UPDATE: Video of Netanyahu calling the tunnels an act of war.

America is pulling (all?) troops out of Syria and accepts Assad is there to stay, and Russia has slashed flights in Syria. The major fighting for territory is pretty much over in Syria other than Idlib. And perhaps Assad has no stomach to contest Turkey there.

If Israel doesn't attack soon, when is a good time?

UPDATE: Regarding the potential U.S. withdrawal from Syria, I'm on record as wanting to remain to protect the Kurds and oppose the Iranian overland line of supply to Hezbollah (I've given up on staying to defeat Assad--that ship sailed).

The only good thing about pulling out is that we avoid a Beirut Barracks disaster from staying after a mission ends (defeating ISIL in this case) out of inertia with no new mission to focus our troops. If we have other means to aid the Kurds that's one reason to remain removed.

And if Israel cripples Hezbollah, that's another reason to stay removed.

UPDATE: Israel says it will compensate for the American withdrawal from Syria by doing more to stop Iran in Syria:

Israel will escalate its fight against Iranian-aligned forces in Syria after the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the country, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday.

But it would be hard to act more from the air to block Iranian land lines of supply in eastern Syria.

Could this claim be a cover for preparations for a far more effective campaign to harm Iranian-aligned forces by striking hard at Hezbollah's Lebanon stronghold?

UPDATE: Okay, so we know France for one will remain in eastern Syria:

France will keep troops in northern Syria for now because Islamic State militants have not been wiped out, contrary to the U.S. view, and has started talks with the United States on the conditions and calendar of its withdrawal, officials said.

France is a leading member of the U.S.-led coalition fighting militants in Syria and Iraq and has around 1,000 troops including special forces based in the north of the country, deployed alongside local Kurdish and Arab forces.

So American air power is likely to remain on station and on call to help the French troops who are helping the Kurds.

This is good. Although lack of pre-announcement discussions (if the French are accurately relaying this information) is bad.

UPDATE: The UN force in Lebanon confirms tunnels on the Lebanon side of the border and says Hezbollah violated the 2006 ceasefire.

And Israel says that Hezbollah shut down precision rocket plants in Lebanon.

But while saying they are not producing weapons (that would defeat the Iron Dome anti-rocket defense system that relies on most rockets not hitting their target), Netanyahu highlights a threat to Israel at the whim of Hezbollah unless Israel does something about it.

UPDATE: The latest CRS report on the war in Syria.

UPDATE: I disagree that defeating ISIL was a favor to Iran; but I did note the Lebanon angle, no?

Sure, That Outcome Would Be Lovely

Articles like this crack me up:

With a new UN Syrian envoy soon to be in place, and an apparently strong international desire to end the war, here are three essential elements of a workable post-war Syria: [First, ensure that refugees and all other displaced Syrians have a home to return to. Second, the Syrian government and others need to reveal what happened to the disappeared. Finally, there needs to be progress on justice.] ...

None of these efforts will be easy to accomplish. But if the aim is to see a peaceful and prosperous Syria, then they are essential.

Just who in Syria seeks a "peaceful and prosperous Syria?"

Assad who just wants to rule?

Russia which just wants bases?

Iran which just wants to destroy Israel?

So none of those actors "must" do anything at all to explain the "disappeared" or do any other lovely thing that actors unwilling to refrain from killing hundreds of thousands and driving millions into refugee status within Syria and abroad to get their objectives would need to do to get a peaceful and prosperous Syria.

Assad won. And he brought Russia and Iran along for the ride. The idea that the winners will say, "Oh sorry! We repent!" is delusional.

Arguably, the only people who wanted a peaceful and prosperous Syria were those who rose up against Assad in 2011 but were killed off by Assad and marginalized by jihadis (part of Assad's intent) as the war dragged on.

And we got here because America refused to lead a response early in the rebellion when everyone assumed Assad was doomed, out of a misguided notion that our actions would "further militarize" the conflict.

Is Syria still a "significant success" in our diplomacy?

Weekend Data Dump

This article describes post-war lessons of Russia's late World War II campaign in Courland. It lacks any discussion of the aspects I think we should learn about wartime lessons: keeping a lot of troops in the Baltic states when the enemy has the strategic initiative and can cut you off by driving through Poland and kill you when convenient is a huge mistake. And given that anybody with any sense, given that reality, knows you would only put forces into the Baltic states if you plan on taking the strategic initiative, it would be seen as threatening by Russia even if they aren't paranoid. Although the post-war issues also provides a good lesson about not losing to the Russians.

Don't forget that rather than being a simple journalist, Khashoggi was a player in information warfare who suddenly found himself on the opposite side of Saudi leadership. Which actually sounds a lot like American journalists after November 2016. Maybe that explains the publicity they provide. Not that this fact excuses a brutal murder, but let's not turn Khashoggi into a First Amendment martyr. Tip to Instapundit.

"Mesopotamia (modern-day Iraq), Egypt, Vietnam, India, and San Marino are believed to be some of the oldest countries in the world." So why are the Chinese the only people widely claimed to have epic long-range planning ability? And I'm skeptical about that. I'm rooting for San Marino to take the crown.

The global warming activists should bow down before America and worship us.  But they won't because words are more important than results, apparently. Who's saving the planet now, knuckleheads? Tip to Instapundit.

Russia's space program inherited from the Soviet empire continues to fade to one more appropriate to a regional power.

I like Mattis. But Trump gets to choose the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff notwithstanding tradition and Mattis' desire to maintain that. Sometimes the interpretations that must make it about Trump is just ridiculous. Honestly, what would these journalists say about creeping military dictatorship if Mattis essentially got the pick and could veto the selection of Army General Milley?

More detail on the Open Skies Treaty flight we made over Ukraine that I mentioned earlier.

The SAFE file-sharing system isn't as safe as it should be, apparently.

In an era of long-range precision missiles, the Air Force is moving toward the ability to move small groups of planes to austere bases to reduce the problem of putting all of our eggs in a small number of airfield baskets. Which is especially useful for our 120 "combat-coded" F-22s.

Plague and war ride across eastern Congo. A lovely combination.

China has threatened Canada with severe consequences if it extradites the chief financial officer of Huawei to the United States. The article only mentions dealing with Iran but as I understand it there are espionage angles to this, too. Which would explain China's severe reaction. Also, the Chinese summoned our ambassador to demand America cancel the extradition request. The Chinese really don't want the CFO talking to us. And contrary to this author, I totally believe the bloated American government bureaucracy could do this without a head up reaching Trump. Also, huh. And another. If I was a Westerner in China now, I'd leave.

India is bypassing their dysfunctional military design bureaucracy by buying Israeli air defense systems. Although the dysfunctional procurement system still stands in the way of doing that to a degree.

I know that a number of people on the right think it would be a good idea to relocate federal government functions from its concentration in Washington, D.C. to locations in the center of the country to put the employees back in touch with the people. I used to think that this had some merit but now I think that creating mini-WDCs in the interior would simply infect the interior with the pro-statist thinking that dominates the federal bureaucracy. Rather than move the federal employees to the various states I think it would be better to move a lot of the responsibilities to the states.

I would have preferred it if Trump hadn't tweaked Macron for the tax riots in Paris. But Macron had it coming given his broadside against nationalism that those on the left celebrated as a tweak against Trump.

Of course. I'm so old I remember when the Afghanistan campaign was the "good" and "necessary" war. Tip to Instapundit. To be fair to those who want to get out, just as I have argued that losing Vietnam in 1975 was far superior to losing in 1965 when the impact would have shaken local nations under threat of communist takeover; losing Afghanistan today could be superior to losing 17 years ago. Although comparisons to Vietnam are silly, except that our failure to back South Vietnam forfeited our sacrifice. Really, if we had done in South Vietnam what we are doing now in backing Afghan forces who have replaced American and our Coalition infantry in the frontline mission, we might have won the Vietnam War. I still think that we'd have more options to dealing with Pakistan's role in sustaining the Taliban in Afghanistan if we had a friendly non-nutball Iran to serve as a line of supply to the sea for landlocked Afghanistan as an alternative to Pakistan, which limits what we can do to punish Pakistan for backing the Taliban.

Don't tell me you find this shocking: "A judgement by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Monday gives the UK the right to unilaterally withdraw its notification to leave the EU." I keep writing that Britain must Brexit while it can on time under whatever deal they have, and worry about amending the terms later. Because if Britain doesn't leave now, it never will as Remainers learn from the mistake of asking the British people their opinion; and as the EU learns to entangle Britain even more in the growing European bureaucracy. Tip to Instapundit.

"Yellow vest" unrest in Paris continues despite French security efforts. I don't know why conservatives here look at the opponents of Macron as allies. They are not our friends on policy and we should not side with violent rioters. Really, we should view this as the Iran-Iraq War and hope both sides lose.

Maduro claims Trump is plotting to overthrow him. No such luck. Venezuela will have to endure the end game of socialism in all its glory. Pity Hugo Chavez wasn't overthrown a long time ago. But we can write the script if we had, now can't we? If there is justice, Maduro ends his days dead hanging from a lamp post.

Ukraine's navy will challenge Russia's blockade of the Sea of Azov.

Canary in the coal mine. And no worries, when the state runs out of one kind of enemies of the people, the state will find more enemies.Tip to the PJ Media live blog.

Good. Accountability can't focus on the lower ranking enlisted men and officers. As a rule I'm inclined to judge that shit happens in war and not every defeat is a crime or outrage. Learn, yes. But scapegoating is wrong. And putting inexperienced troops into harm's way is no way to go even if you slap the "special forces" label on them. And neglecting to support them adequately was a command failure.

When dealing with international bodies that require consensus, China has found it useful to buy friends. Europe is a target, too. Thanks Hungary, which takes on the role of Cambodia in ASEAN.

From the "Well, Duh" files: NATO's battlegroups in the Baltic states can't stop a serious Russian invasion. Well, yeah. They are just a tripwire. But if NATO sent enough troops to stop a Russian invasion, the force would be seen as a threat to St. Petersburg. And Russia would simply cut them off with a drive to Kaliningrad further south and let them wither and die.

"Two Russian strategic bomber aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons have landed in ally Venezuela, a show of support for Venezuela's socialist government that has infuriated Washington." What the bombers were actually carrying was probably toilet paper for the Russians to sell for hard currencies at sky-high prices in Caracas. But seriously, this just a stunt with no impact on our security. I seriously can't get worked up over this "Look at Me Theater."

Gosh, why on Earth would the Saudis reject a UN force in Hodeidah port in Yemen? There is a deal for opening Hodeidah that doesn't involve UN troops, it seems. This is false compassion in action, I believe. But Saudi Arabia is in a poor position to resist selective international outrage and pressure.

Nigeria continues to battle jihadis and corruption.

Trump says he could use the arrest of Huawei CFO as bargaining chip on trade. In theory that is fine. But it makes it look like her arrest was nothing more than a hostage taking. Unless a release is after a conviction on damning information made public. And honestly, once the CFO is released on bail, I fully expect Chinese security people of being capable of removing the ankle bracelet and getting her out into international waters for a trip home.

Is the American historical profession committing suicide? Well, it's mostly dead to me. When I went to the American Historical Association's 1991 meeting in Chicago with my still minty fresh MA in history, I was horrified and disappointed at how little my professional organization cared for military and diplomatic history. The body clearly leaned far left. And the main publication reflected those characteristics. In short order I let my membership lapse and never looked back. It has been a long road to suicide. And I fully agree with the observation “History is past politics and politics present history.” My bachelor's was a double major in political science and history. I still consider myself lucky to have had an actual military history course in grad school (the now deceased Professor Abbott).

So a Russian motor rifle division in their southern military district now has three motor rifle (mechanized infantry) regiments and two tank regiments? Unless that includes a tank battalion in each of the motor rifle regiments, calling them effectively a regiment, that's a big division. The district includes Russian-occupied Crimea and territory on Ukraine's eastern border including the Donbas.

I don't understand why we can't cut food stamp benefits when we have record low unemployment and record high obesity. Well, actually I do know why. Once a federal program gets rolling it is virtually impossible to kill.

Oh good Lord.

That evil twit Maduro accused America of plotting to invade that jewel of Latin America, Venezuela. (I'm not clear if this is a separate claim from the "overthrow" charge he leveled.) I can totally see Maduro claiming the Dutch island of Curacao is to be the staging point for the Yankee invasion. and ordering his forces to land on and occupy the lightly defended island. He'll claim he is landing a blow against colonialism to reinvigorate leftist enthusiasm for his socialist disaster site. As I've said, the only circumstances I could see for US troops would be as part of a multilateral intervention to secure ports and airports for an influx of humanitarian aid following a collapse of Venezuelan society. Although, yeah, I hope the Brazilian and Colombian contingents head straight for the palace.

They have to destroy democracy to save it? The funny thing is, if this anti-democratic move took place, the monarch of Britain would become a mere prince or princess who bends the knee to Brussels where the real imperial power will reside. Tip to the PJ Media live blog.

Alt-hate. If modern feminism is the women's auxiliary of liberalism, as I think; the Women's March is the women's auxiliary of hate if the organizers have anything to say about it.

Earlier reports of China putting spying hardware into motherboards seems false despite the original source standing by the claim.  I noted the original claim so I should note the problems with the claim.

The 29-year old suspected killer at a French Christmas market was convicted 27 times in three countries for theft and armed robbery? When did he have time to commit all those crimes given the amount of time he must have been behind bars awaiting trial or serving time??!! Or do the Europeans simply have a firm "30 strikes and you're out" policy?

Mars China needs women! There will be collateral damage if Burma Myanmar is hit with sanctions. But Chinese bachelors will be happy.

Pilots love the F-35. Will hackers love it, too? I worried about the software vulnerability despite pilot raves in exercises before Israeli pilots had a chance to fly the plane in a combat environment. And I worried about the ALIS system before the plane could even be flown in exercises. But at least I'm no longer worried about the plane and its fighting concept itself--which Russia really tried to kill with information operations.

I assume other navies have bigger problems with this sort of submarine maintenance issue. Tip to Instapundit. Although the impact of sequestration may still be flowing through the system. Remember, the biggest problem wasn't the level of overall spending but the inflexibility that prevented money from being moved to more needed categories of defense spending. If my memory on this issue is good, of course.

Turkey plans to go into northeast Syria to attack Kurds allied to America. Russia smiles. And Iran. And Assad. No wonder the Turks are eager to get America mad at Saudi Arabia. I suppose Erdogan doesn't want the non-Kurds of Turkey to notice he thinks of them as potential enemies of the state, too. If Turkey goes in, I'd hold F-35 deliveries at risk to stop Turkey. Of course, I want to do that anyway given Erdogan's behavior as an unreliable ally lately.

Remember, China forced Western countries to turn over technology to get the "free" trade that Trump is supposedly waging war against. It is overdue to revise the bad terms of trade that China uses to build a military to impose its will on Asia and eventually the world.

You know, it is a good point that America could take advantage of Chinese with poor "social credit" scores for keeping out "good" Chinese. And we could use it for our own espionage, defection, migration, and otherwise for causing trouble for the increasingly dictatorial Chinese state. Having China score their own people would save us time, you must admit. Clever. I'm ashamed that didn't occur to me!

The National Guard celebrated its 382nd birthday on December 13th.

North Korean will go hungry as the leaders refuse to commit to denuclearization. I remain skeptical that North Korea will agree to a real deal as opposed to a pretend deal that gives them goodies while leaving them free to pursue nukes quietly. China continues to build up the road net north of North Korea, taking advantage of their lower trade. While this will allow more trade, it will also support the logistics of an invasion, no? While Chinese control of a non-nuclear North Korea is preferable to a nuclear North Korea, I think a partition is still the way to go.

I'm going to say "no."  I appreciate the call for heavy armor but even if the Russian Armata is as good as the author claims, there is no way Russia can afford to build many. Yet the Army has to get on the ball. We can't afford another failed tank design project that then forces us to update the Abrams--again. Eventually that safety net will fail from age. The Challenger is in the same position, which the British author discusses. And the German Leopard II for that matter and the French Leclerc.

Neptune's Wrath.

How cute, the Kremlin is pretending they have an independent judicial system that must run its course in the case of the Ukrainian sailors captured and held by Russia at the Kerch Strait. The sailors will be released given that it seems like Trump made their release a condition to meet with Putin again.

If you wonder why the China abuses Moslems to keep Xinjiang under full control.

When revenues increase and deficits continue to rise, please stop saying that we have a revenue problem.  I'd have sympathy for the argument that we should not cut taxes when we run deficits and have a climbing debt if both didn't continue to plague us regardless of tax levels.

The last population center of the rump ISIL caliphate, the "Hajin pocket" in Syria, was largely taken by the Coalition-backed SDF at a high cost in casualties. Reportedly 900 dead jihadis and 500 dead SDF fighters, plus 320 civilians killed. That seems high, although it appears to count since early September, but that is what the early news states.

Ever closer (European monetary) union.

Democracy and rule of law seem to be coming to Armenia without much notice. But their reliance on Russia to defend them from Turkey and Azerbaijan is not about to end.

Assuming they don't die or get thrown in prison, of course.

The Russians will lose carrier aviation for a generation after their PD-50 dry dock accident. Which, for Russia, is a gift from God. Russia only needs SSBNs for a survivable nuclear deterrent, ships and subs to protect them, and coastal defense forces. Anything after that is in the category of want. Come on Russia, fix that red sports car!

Iran wages cyber war more intensely following America's restoration of sanctions to slow Iran's nuclear weapons work. At what point does Iran go real world kinetic in response?

Well, there goes the neighborhood. Seriously, the French "yellow vest" rioters are no friends of America.

Prime Minister May survived a no-confidence vote. But I fear that Brexit will falter despite the government's pre-Brexit vote pledge that the government would carry out the results of the vote with no caveats. Remainers want another vote because pro-EU forces always want voting to continue until they get the result they want. And only then is the matter settled. More on that here. Britain has to exit on any terms they have now no matter how flawed and worry about amending them in the future when out of the EU when Britain will have more freedom to act. I know that there are pro-Brexit people who reject the current deal and the baseless panic over a deal-less exit from the EU. And I agree with them--if Britain leaves on time without a deal. But I fear that lack of a deal will be the wedge to delay Brexit and ultimately defeat it despite the vote that the government pledged to carry out (when the government assumed Remain would win). That's my view.

Pity the Weekly Standard went out of business. I know some say it went fully anti-Trump and that is the cause. But I honestly didn't notice such a shift because the new paywall prevented me from routinely seeing it. So I just checked in when an article was linked from another site or an occasional cold visit. And in those visits I didn't notice any particular change (but then, I don't bristle at criticisms of Trump policies or tone as opposed to resenting Trump Hysteria Condition that afflicts the left (and some on the right) leading them to condemn Trump actions that Obama did too with nary a peep back in the age of Hope and Change).

Russia wants to discuss resuming lapsed inspections for the INF treaty. That sounds like delaying because at this point the issue is our knowledge of Russian violations of the treaty notwithstanding the expiration of the 1987 treaty's inspections provisions.

The United States Senate voted to oppose the US aid in the Yemen war. Funny, this was once called the model theater. Notwithstanding the Khashoggi murder's seriousness, the Senate is just falling for Iranian propaganda efforts. Trump should reject the advice. And Sanders is wrong about war powers (as he is on the issue of war itself). It is not a power unique to Congress despite their exclusive power to declare war. The Tripolitan War and Quasi War with France conducted without declarations of war early in our history when that constitutional issue was fresh should make this clear. The issue is nuanced, which I believe is the apex of intellectual capacity.

I had forgotten about this largest loss of life in a single incident for the 101st Airborne Division. War is Hell but even peace can be Hellish.

Oh sure, force the extremely pale woman to recant, but "Beto" still gets to be Hispanic? Sexism is ugly to behold.

The Army is buying enough active protection systems to equip all of one brigade's Bradleys.

A blow is struck in the battle to separate the Ukrainian church from Putin's state. I'm sure somebody somewhere will explain how this is one more brilliant Putin strategy.

But in the real war, Gorilla Ice is on the job. Putin will not allow a mine shaft rap gap to develop. Putin will clamp down on everything. Vise, vise, baby.

I'm going to try to reduce my blogging. I did manage to scale back 4 years ago after a surge in post-Crimea blogging threatened to be business as usual. And I need to slow down more. I'm no so much tired of it as increasingly aware that blogging lost to social media. My traffic lately appears to be down to 20% of what I had pre-social media and trends down on a monthly basis. I don't have high confidence in Blogger statistics given that Google does not use those hit statistics to pay for advertising income. Yes, the Blogger statistics do clearly pick up links that the add-on Statcounter misses. But regardless of where the true audience size is, the trend is there. Clearly I don't get the bang for the buck I used to get. What's the point now, really? And the Iraq War 2.0 major combat operations phase is over. The looming Iraq War was what motivated me to blog back in 2002. And we won that war--and then re-won it. Really, you didn't notice? So in a way it is blog mission accomplished. This is still a useful outlet and incubator for ideas and sources that I have used for articles. I cannot imagine migrating to the cesspools of Facebook or Twitter. So I can't imagine abandoning this. And I can't imagine being anything but a solo blogger. Basically, I need to focus more on regular writing. And really, when I started the blog on the old Geocities site I worried if I'd be able to add material even once per week! That's why the original site had a lot of separate site categories, modeled on my blogfather James Lileks. I miss his commentary on foreign affairs, BTW.

Mistake Alert

This decision is a missed opportunity for a two-fer:

President Trump has canceled the White House holiday party for the media, making the decades-old tradition a victim of his increasingly contentious relationship with major news organizations.

The party should go on, with tacquitos and Bud Lite on the menu (sounding like one of my gatherings, I admit) and little velvet gift bags with a lump of coal for each member of the naughty press.

Slamming the biased media and global warming fanaticism at the same time!

Okay, But Why is He Great?

Je Suis Christmas Market?

Police searched through eastern France on Wednesday for a man suspected of killing at least two people in a gun attack on a Christmas market in Strasbourg and who was known to have been religiously radicalized while in jail.

Witnesses told investigators the assailant cried out "Allahu Akbar" (God is Greater) as he launched his attack on the market, the Paris prosecutor said.

And as we know, the jihadi suspect had followed a criminal path:

Cherif Chekatt's criminal career began at age 10. By age 13 he had been convicted. Now, with his third decade still incomplete, he is a fugitive, accused in the deadly shooting at France's most famous Christmas market.

The 29-year-old has more than two dozen convictions, mostly in France but also in Switzerland and Germany.

As I noted back in March with another such case:

A jihadi claiming ISIL affiliation was killed after the jihadi killed 3 in France. The jihadi demonstrated the link between Moslem criminals and jihadis. It's almost as if guilt over crime convinces the Moslem criminal to go on a personal jihad to redeem their sin-filled life. Which is fairly twisted, you must admit.

These young men believe Allah is great because he approves killing innocents as a means of redeeming a life of crime.

As I started out, will this be a Je Suis Christmas Market moment? Don't be silly, in the aftermath nobody will be carrying candy cane pins the way people sported pencils for a short time to reject jihadi violence against a French satirical magazine.

Those Christmas markets will soon be banned because the world went from Je Suis Charlie to Je Suis Sorry very quickly in the face of jihadi death threats.

Note also: he was a known wolf, again. And there are 26,000 others on the French "S File" watch list. France needs to worry more about car bomb footprints than they worry about carbon footprints.

Our world will be better when COEXIST bumper stickers are routinely seen in Riyadh and when HATE HAS NO HOME HERE signs dot Islamabad neighborhoods. Because America is not the problem.

When Did Canada Stop Being an American Ally?

Excuse me?

Behind the arrest is a U.S.-China conflict that is not just a trade war, but a technology war in which Canada is caught in the middle – and that war’s headlong geopolitical competition is hurtling toward a crisis.

Canada is "caught in the middle?"

Is China not stealing a lot of technology from the West to build an economy and military to rival America and rewrite the rules that the world--including Canada--has done so well under since World War II?

Is not Canada a formal treaty ally of the United States?

When did Canada becomes a neutral that hopes to avoid getting hurt when great powers compete over whether dystopian state China or free America dominates the world and sets the rules?

Where is the author's coveted nuance in that choice?

What the Hell happened to the Canada that bled with our troops in Afghanistan to defeat one threat to the West and its freedoms? 

UPDATE: Canadian complaints that we aren't being an ally and that Canada is "alone in the world" because we don't back them in a diplomatic dispute over human rights with Saudi Arabia is ridiculous.

The moment Saudi Arabia is a real threat to Canada we will protect Canada. Until then, we need Saudi Arabia despite their awful human rights record to stop Iran's drive to build a new Persian Empire across the Middle East backed by nuclear weapons.

And really, if Saudi Arabia is responding to Canadian punishment over human rights by withholding Saudi money, shouldn't Canada have blocked that money in the first place on principle?

Honestly, this Canada-Saudi issue went from a "spat" to a vital Canadian interest that requires the activation of a military alliance to prove our friendship?

The Back-Up Carrier in Action

Having an American amphibious warship with F-35Bs deployed in Japan gives Japan a close up look on how their new not-a-carrier could function.

An American amphibious warship equipped as a light carrier forward deployed in Japan is coming back to America next year. It did a lot while there:

Over the last year, the Wasp has set some historic milestones for the Navy’s amphibious fleet. The F-35B made its deployment debut aboard the Wasp in March, during the ship’s first mission after arriving in Japan.

The aircraft, from Marine Attack Fighter Squadron 121 at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, helped test the Up-gunned Expeditionary Strike Group concept that pairs two guided-missile destroyers and the F-35B with a traditional amphibious readiness group.

Japan is thinking of altering their larger helicopter destroyer to operate F-35Bs (which I noted in a recent data dump), as the United States has done with a couple of our big-deck amphibious warships.

Seriously, a pacifist constitution isn't meant to be a suicide pact.

The new America will replace Wasp in Japan according to an article that I lost when Firefox helpfully restarted, killing my open tabs. I noted the unique America quite some time ago. Actually quite some time ago.

Implausible Deniability

I'm on board the sentiment that the West should help Ukraine defeat Russian aggression, but just stop with the "hybrid" warfare hyperventilating:

Over the past four and a half years, Ukrainian society has grown grimly familiar with a unique brand of creeping Russian aggression that has been carefully calibrated to cause maximum damage while avoiding the crippling costs implicit in a more conventional campaign. Russia’s hybrid hostilities have extended far beyond the country’s thinly veiled military intervention in eastern Ukraine, with Moscow also making use of targeted assassinations, cyberattacks, trade embargoes, and disinformation campaigns to keep Ukraine permanently destabilized and to prevent the country’s final escape from the Kremlin’s sphere of influence. Throughout it all, the one constant has been a desire to disguise Russian involvement. This emphasis on plausible deniability made Russia’s November 25 naval attack on three Ukrainian vessels a watershed moment. For the first time since the start of the conflict in spring 2014, Russian forces operating under the Russian flag had openly attacked Ukraine.

At best, Russia's invasion has been a "subliminal war" as I called it early on (or "slothkrieg" as I also called it) if you have to tag it with a new name--the "hybrid" war junk is nonsense as far as I'm concerned.

And it just astounds me that Russia's invasions can be described as having "plausible deniability." Who on Earth doesn't know--and didn't know from the start--that Russia obviously invaded Ukraine?

Help Ukraine send body bags back to Russia. That's how we defeat Russia's aggression.

Remember, the Russians are not longer the people willing to endure heavy casualties for the glory of their leader.

UPDATE: NATO is still helping Ukraine:

NATO will supply Ukraine’s military with secure communication equipment this month, its head Jens Stoltenberg told President Petro Poroshenko at a meeting on Thursday called to discuss an escalation of Kiev’s conflict with Moscow.

Ukraine is not (yet) in NATO. But if Ukraine falls to the Russian in fact or in vassal status, NATO will be on the frontline in the Balkans.

UPDATE: And that current rear area on the land front needs prodding to provide military capabilities.

Cause and Effect?

I see the post 9/11 "why do they hate us" question is being revived. And of course the answer is we are responsible.

Really?

Were we to pull back [from Afghanistan after peace talks allow America a "face-saving retreat"], however, the danger is that our enemies may find even more space to regroup and expand. The Taliban, embittered by two decades of battling America, could underwrite a campaign not unlike the one that led Osama bin Laden to launch his horrific attack on the World Trade Center, which in turn brought the U.S. to Afghanistan.

He's Mister Short-Term Memory!

Question: What led the Taliban to support al Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attack on America (which struck the Pentagon, too, as well as including the thwarted attack that ended with a crash dive with passengers and crew held prisoner in Pennsylvania) before being "embittered by two decades of battling America" in Afghanistan?

It's almost like they hate us for who we are. Or perhaps, given how many non-jihadi Moslems the jihadis kill, for who we aren't.

Face it, some people in the Moslem world are pre-embittered. Only killing them is an option.

And remember that al Qaeda's war that they waged against us well before 9/11 hasn't worked out well for them or the jihadi cause in general. 

Sadly, our military and security actions are a holding action against the symptom of the dysfunction that can only be really solved by helping the rational Moslems defeat the jihadi minority in what is actually an Islamic Civil War over who gets to define Islam.

And in the meantime, I'll ask again why do we hate us?